TracFone and Gila River Telecom disagreed in docket 11-42 filings...

or training,” while Gila River said the commission “has ample statutory authority to permit Universal Service Funds to be used for equipment and training.” Providing equipment and training “would contribute to greater broadband adoption,” TracFone acknowledged (http://xrl.us/bmbvtf), but Section 254(b) of the Telecom Act is clear that “funding for such equipment and training must come from other sources.” But Gila River said the same section, as well as Sections 151 and 154(i), gives the FCC “broader mandates” to help adoption (http://xrl.us/bmbvth). Section 254(b) says the FCC and the Joint Board “shall base policies for the preservation and advancement of universal service,” which Gila River said “makes clear the primary tenet of universal service” is to provide access to advanced telecom and information services. Several commenters focused on the Lifeline program’s “one per residence” rule. Typical were comments from CompTel’s Mary Albert: “Substituting a single line per qualifying adult rule for the proposed single line per residential address rule would better promote the availability of voice service by ensuring that the neediest of low income consumers are not denied Lifeline/Link Up assistance simply because they do not have a unique fixed residential address recognized by the U.S. Postal Service or because they live in group facilities.” CenturyLink urged the commission to “consider a limited scale pilot program to provide universal service support to promote broadband adoption,” and said the FCC shouldn’t “restrict Link Up discounts solely to service initiations that involve the physical installation of facilities by providers at a consumer’s residence” and should “not adopt a sample-and-census approach for verifying Lifeline eligibility.”